[Saltwater Images]

Hello. I currently shoot American Football from the sidelines with a K-5II and a HD DA 70 most of the time. My standard kit is the 21, 40, 70 pancake trio. I used zooms for years and have come to enjoy the deliberate process of shooting primes and moving with the ebb and flow of a game or event. It keeps me more connected with the action. Although I prefer primes, I'm looking to add a longer DA* lens that could potentially be a zoom.

The dilemma;
I will be adding a longer lens to my kit in the upcoming weeks. No one here carries any of these lenses so they are special order only; not refundable - no matter what vendor you shop from. The DFA 70-200 is outside of my budget. I borrowed a friend's DA* 50-135 and while it was an amazing piece of glass - the AF was sluggish on my K-5II (not even close to the blazing speed of the screw-drive on the HD DA 70).

There are 3 lenses in consideration; the DA* 200 f2.8, DA* 60-250 f4, DA* 300 f4. Most of my shooting is outside so f4 is reasonable. The 300 may be a tad long unless the AF is outstanding. The two that are at the top of the list are the DA* 200 and DA* 60-250.

I suspect the AF may be faster on the DA* 200 simply because it is a prime (but I have no experience with the lens to qualify that). Does anyone have experience shooting sports with one or both of these lenses. How has the AF performance been for you? Do you have any great image captures to share where AF speed was critical?

Thanks in advance for your input.

Duane

[Ari]

AF on the DA* SDM lenses are not very fast as a group. I have had most of them and they're just....sluggish. They are, however, a good bargain on the used front right now as everyone is gearing up for the k-1. Price point may be a good reason to consider them - in terms of IQ, they are all incredible.

[jeffryscott]

The 60-250 AF is much much faster than the 50-135 and a good range for sports. I believe it would work reasonably well for your purposes.

[jeallen01]

Screw-drive Tamron/Sigma 70-200 F2.8 lenses could be alternatives?

[Saltwater Images]

Weather sealed is a must. I live on weather-beaten rainy rock in the North Atlantic. For this reason 3rd party lenses are not in the mix.

[jddwoods]

Hello. I currently shoot American Football from the sidelines with a K-5II and a HD DA 70 most of the time. My standard kit is the 21, 40, 70 pancake trio. I used zooms for years and have come to enjoy the deliberate process of shooting primes and moving with the ebb and flow of a game or event. It keeps me more connected with the action. Although I prefer primes, I'm looking to add a longer DA* lens that could potentially be a zoom.

The dilemma;
I will be adding a longer lens to my kit in the upcoming weeks. No one here carries any of these lenses so they are special order only; not refundable - no matter what vendor you shop from. The DFA 70-200 is outside of my budget. I borrowed a friend's DA* 50-135 and while it was an amazing piece of glass - the AF was sluggish on my K-5II (not even close to the blazing speed of the screw-drive on the HD DA 70).

There are 3 lenses in consideration; the DA* 200 f2.8, DA* 60-250 f4, DA* 300 f4. Most of my shooting is outside so f4 is reasonable. The 300 may be a tad long unless the AF is outstanding. The two that are at the top of the list are the DA* 200 and DA* 60-250.

I suspect the AF may be faster on the DA* 200 simply because it is a prime (but I have no experience with the lens to qualify that). Does anyone have experience shooting sports with one or both of these lenses. How has the AF performance been for you? Do you have any great image captures to share where AF speed was critical?

Thanks in advance for your input.

Duane

I have the DA* 200 and my thought is that it autofocuses too slow for sports. I use it for birds and more often than not I end up using manual focus. The issue is latency, there is a delay between when I half press the shutter to when the autofocus actually starts moving. I don't believe I have a problem with the lens, rather this is just the way it is. Form what I read the DA* 60 to 250 and DA* 300 do focus faster. I hope this helps.

[sergysergy]

Too bad WR is necessary. I have found the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and the Sigma 300 2.8 are a bit faster than the 60-250.

[jeallen01]

Weather sealed is a must. I live on weather-beaten rainy rock in the North Atlantic. For this reason 3rd party lenses are not in the mix.

Do they play American football right on the waterfront?

If not, can you not fit one of the 3rd party zooms with a weather-resistant "coat" like one of these?

[fwwidall]

I've owned a DA*200mm for almost five years now, and have shot lots of sports with over the years including football, soccer, rugby and hockey, indoors and outdoors, in good light and bad light.

I've never felt that the autofocus was particularly slow and I've always been impressed with its sharpness and rendering.

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]


This year I decided to add a DA*300mm and if anything it is an even better lens. I like the added reach, and its weather sealing can be very handy. The following image was taken in the middle of a torrential downpour.

[IMG][/IMG]





They are both very good lenses, and I'm sure you'd be happy with either one.

If you'd like more examples I have lots more images on Flickr.

Here are my images shot with the DA*200 and DA*300.

[elementdtlop]

the hd 55-300 might be worth a look but the af hunts a lot sometimes. at $250 new its not really a big investment compared to like 1k$. with american football depending on the angle and all i dont see mf being exceptionally difficult depending the situation but if u were to af then a zoom would be nice to frame better on the fly instead of having to crop. outdoors the 55-300 should be plenty fast to bump ss up without bumping up iso. i use it on beach with my dog and unless shes coming right at me af is pretty snappy. with football ud be far enough away that the focusing range shouldnt be so wide that it should struggle too much especially if u are already focused to that relative range already. the hd has quick shift too. great lens for cost but if u wanna go for the big guns go for it.

[clackers]

Screwdrive will be faster, unless you buy the 70-200 or 150-450.

So a Tamron 70-200 or converted 50-135 are my additional suggestions for you - they're what I use.

[rawr]

The new D FA 70-200 would be a no-brainer as a sports lens, of course ...

But Sigma's HSM lenses - like my 70-200 HSM II or the newer Sigma OS 70-200 - are very fast and good for sports. If you can find one of those, and don't need WR, that would be my recommendation. (An all-weather lens cover off eBay could easily take care of the WR issue).

The DA*300 SDM is a tad slower than the Sigma HSM, but certainly still useful for sports, but is simply not as flexible as a 70-200 for erratically moving subjects.

Plus note that good AF performance a result of camera and lens working well together. In this regard, the 11 point AF of the K-5II has been considerably updated in the K-3/K-3 II, alongside the AF-C and tracking modes, making it an improved sports shooter / lens driver. Something else to factor into the mix.

[Saltwater Images]

Hi fwwidall. Those shots are terrific examples. How far away are you with the rainy football shot? It's dynamite. Do you disable AF for shutter half-press and use the AF button with AF set to AFC? I do this with the 70 and there is no issue with latency as the AF is already tracking before the shutter releases. What process do you use?

[Sandy Hancock]

The DFA 70-200 is outside of my budget.

Find a way to change that situation

But seriously, I have shot Australian football with the DA*60-250 and DA*300 and it was a frustrating experience. Mind you the ball moves further, faster, more often and less predictably than in American football so your needs may be more easily met.

[fwwidall]

Hi fwwidall. Those shots are terrific examples. How far away are you with the rainy football shot? It's dynamite. Do you disable AF for shutter half-press and use the AF button with AF set to AFC? I do this with the 70 and there is no issue with latency as the AF is already tracking before the shutter releases. What process do you use?

Here's the uncropped, unedited image and as you can see the action pretty much filled the frame so I wasn't too far away, maybe 40 yards or so.

I generally tend to use the back AF button, so the answer is probably. I just ran the image through the excellent 'exiftool', but didn't see any information on the back button so I can't tell for sure.

It did however tell me that I used AF-C, Expanded Area 25-point, and that the center AF point was used.

I'm still experimenting with the many combinations of settings on the K3 to find the best settings, particularly for the basketball and volleyball images I shoot. I'm lucky if I get 20% in focus, but with lousy light, high ISO, fast close action and lots of bodies getting in the way I'll take it. I think the biggest issue my not anticipating where the ball is going - I'm usually trying to catch up with the action. I tend to use my DA*50-135mm for indoors sports which has great image quality but doesn't appear to have the fastest autofocus.

Fred.